As I listened to the pre-election rabble, particularly from 700 WLW where Scott Sloan and Bill Cunningham have shown they are willing to form their beliefs around program management and not core ideals, I thought of my friend Doc Thompson who had to leave the station shortly after the 2011 election. I’ve talked to Doc about his last days at Clear Channel and found it surprising to learn that Cunningham for all his support of teachers in public schools did not support collective bargaining agreements at 700 WLW when it came to Doc. Willie took up a lot of payroll and the station couldn’t afford another guy at the station with a conservative slant, which would be the next star of tomorrow, so they picked Willie and sent Doc off to fulfill his career elsewhere. If Clear Channel operated the way public schools did, even Scott Sloan would be approaching the kind of money that Cunningham makes not off performance, ratings, or even years of service, but because a collective bargaining agreement said so. So it was surprising to hear Cunningham and Sloan make the observations they did prior to the election, which will be covered extensively in the days to come.
As the 2013 Election came and went, Doc was on the road with his producer Skip in Topeka, Kansas on a tour with The Blaze Radio Network that had the new radio celebrities broadcasting in a different city each day and giving public appearances along the way. Doc’s career has exploded during 2013 since joining The Blaze employed directly by Glenn Beck. His current job and role is everything that he dreamed of working for several stations all over America before an exit from Clear Channel in Cincinnati, Ohio and Richmond, Virginia that might have otherwise ended his days on the radio. Doc isn’t squandering the opportunity.
Doc Thompson is a conservative libertarian American radio host and political commentator. He hosts The Morning Blaze with Doc Thompson, a radio show on The Blaze Radio Network, which debuted January 21st, 2013. The show airs weekdays from 6am to 9am before the Glenn Beck Radio Program, where he has been a regular guest host since 2008. Doc also provides political analysis, appearing on various television shows such as CNBC’s The Kudlow Report, The Blaze’s Real News, The Glenn Beck Program, The Pat and Stu Show, and special election coverage from Virginia for CNN and Fox News. Doc has been honored to be a part of several teams, receiving a total of 7 Marconi Radio Awards from the National Association of Broadcasters.
Thompson’s broadcast style mixes reporting, commentary, and humor to reflect a conservative libertarian political philosophy with economic views supportive of the free market. Showcasing Doc’s passion and insight, his beliefs and comments are consistent as he discusses personal freedom, personal responsibility, and Constitutional principles.
Born and raised in Ohio, Doc’s career in radio has led him to work in the great states of Alabama, Virginia, Nevada, New Mexico, Nebraska, West Virginia, and Michigan. These years of traveling across America have proved priceless to Doc, as they have allowed him to meet fellow citizens from all walks of life and experience the differing cultures throughout our nation. His entertaining program of political badinage, mixed with daily topical events, is fun, fresh, and different. With a precise blend of candor, news, and humor, Doc’s show is enlightening and informative. He exposes absurdity by lampooning those who deserve it and is driven by exposing the truth. Doc regularly attends rallies, guest hosts radio and television programs, and performs speaking events all over the country. In addition to Doc’s talent in broadcasting, he considers himself a “foodie” because he loves to eat, cook, and try new cuisine while traveling. A self-admitted “pizza-snob”, Doc also enjoys cheap wine and expensive beer!
To truly understand Doc’s beliefs, here are just a few of his favorite quotes:
“Is life so dear, is peace so sweet…” – Patrick Henry
“I have sworn upon the alter of God, eternal hostility…”– Thomas Jefferson
“Doc, I want to hire you for the BRN!”– Glenn Beck
When asked to describe himself, Doc said…
“I’m just like John Stewart, except with very different views, and I host a radio show not TV, and I’m not rich, nor from New York. Okay, that was a really bad comparison! Don’t print that!”
I grew up listening to 700 WLW and during the 1990’s enjoyed the Bill Cunningham Show. I thought the guy was a real conservative, but as it turned out, it was all just an act, and 700 WLW have attached themselves to a sinking ship. Cunningham is nothing but the next generation Jerry Springer and the station has bent their entire programming schedule around his temperament which will prove costly in the years to come. Meanwhile, the one they let get away is more successful than ever and is steadily climbing into popularity. The Blaze Radio Network is gaining traction by the thousands as listeners discover the benefit of good conservative radio that is not limited by a FCC license or controlled by salary hounds perpetually concerned about renewing their contract at the expense of others. Doc no longer has to worry about those kinds of things. He is as free as a radio talk jock can get, and it is so refreshing to hear someone like him on the radio—especially after a grueling election where the system staked against reason is ever-present and ominous. Doc is a reminder that no matter how bad things look today, that tomorrow is a new opportunity to make things right, and within those opportunities are improvements that would not have been seen any other way.
It was good to hear Darryl Parks maintain his position on school levies, and specifically, the Lakota school levy. I have purposely avoided doing talk radio during this latest campaign primarily because the levy fighting going into the future needs to grow and more people must to be involved—and for some talk radio can be an intimidating forum to utilize. Aside from that, there is already a large collection of talk radio interviews that have been done in the past, which are still relevant online. More broadcasts talking about the same topics tend to become counterproductive, so they were avoided strategically. Also involved was the issue that No Lakota Levy wished to maintain their message of fiscal responsibility within the Lakota district where I have evolved into questioning the basic premise of public education and believe that it should be abandoned all together in its current form. Darryl’s position is closer to the No Lakota Levy view, where mine isn’t something that many people are ready to hear, because the answer requires difficult choices—and admissions. Yet Darryl is well aware what is driving the Lakota levy and he talked about it on his Saturday, November 2nd show which can be heard below. The Lakota levy is about wealth redistribution, it is a socialist concept created by progressives, and it’s unconstitutional. It is all about taking from the rich and giving to the poor which is the ugly underbelly of all school levies—but one that gets avoided because of the implications pointing to communist roots. Nobody wants to admit that their school where their children are attending is a socialist concept. Nobody wants to face that the educations they received when they were young was a communist creation, but if they think hard enough, the admission becomes easier once they understand the meanings. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. Darryl smartly stays off that topic, but discusses the result—the cost of the Lakota levy for people with $300K to $400K homes will be an additional $600.00 to $800.00 a year and that will likely mean no summer vacations, no big purchases of new furniture, televisions, or even air travel to an overseas destination. If the Lakota levy were to pass, the people with the most money would have to make sacrifices that those without so much money would otherwise have to make.
Most of the supporters of the Lakota levy are either people who have ridden the coat-tails of those who do have money yet don’t understand the real value—so they are quick to give it away, or they are simply new parents who want what’s best for their children and they believe that public education complete with busing services is the best way to give it to them. These types make up the vast majority of the levy supporters, and they believe that a “rich man” or a well to do household can afford an extra $800 dollars in taxes a year because they have a $400,000 house. They believe that if a business can afford to carry payroll, or the owners have a net worth of over a million dollars that they are required to pay more in taxes so that the child of a family not so fortunate can have an education. Well—anybody who thinks that way is wrong. That belief is a communist sentiment brought to America through the labor union movement, and it is at the heart of every single school levy.
The levy advocates have a bottomless pit of need and they believe that because a homeowner owns a Mercedes, spends $800 on a meal for business clients, and has a home valued over $500K that they have an obligation toward higher taxes—and they are dead wrong. Because the taxes never stop, one of those wealthy tax payers today might pay taxes at $600 to $800 more a year every four years for the life of their businesses and will find that they will either have to move to a district with less taxes, or let the value of their assets decrease so that there will be nothing left once their children inherit their lifetime of hard work. Lakota business owners and residents have been relatively smart in voting down continued school levies—not passing one since 2005. West Chester and Liberty Township are thriving economic communities where other places like Fairfield, Finneytown, and Evendale are struggling because they are yesterday’s has-beens. They said yes to similar letters from school superintendents in the past and it cost them their livelihoods.
Butler County in general was built on a foundation of lower taxes. Why does anybody believe that Bass Pro Shops is leaving Forest Park and moving to West Chester—or here is a better question—why is the economy at Forest Park so bad that the mall there is a virtual ghost town? One, it is taxes, two it is too much government housing and a demographic population that lives off government money. The people of Forest Park have less value for money because the government sends them a check in the mail. Therefore, they do not enjoy the kind of things that Forest Fair Mall tried to offer them over the years as far as retail shopping. So companies moved out or went out of business. They went to West Chester where the taxes are less, and people appreciate nice things. West Chester is still driven by capitalism where Forest Park is drowning in socialism—a string of unfortunate and unintended consequences. I know this first hand, about twenty years ago I was a personal driver for a Bengal player. It was my job to drive him around and make sure he got home safely while he jumped from bar to bar. If people got too close, it was my job to make sure he was covered. I’d drive this guy all over the city to every hot night spot in town. Since I didn’t drink or do drugs, I was a good candidate for this kind of thing and wasn’t tempted to play along. At the end of the day, around 4 AM I’d take him home to his wife. They lived in a nice part of town full of promise. They lived in Forest Park, and thought of it as a land of luxury. Today, that same home is surrounded by Section 8 housing and a welfare demographic that has very few people officially employed. That is why Forest Fair Mall has failed, and the former Bengal player is no longer married to that woman. Bad investments lead to bad lifestyles. Bad lifestyles lead to failed businesses. Failed businesses lead to empty malls like the one at Forest Fair Mall.
Every resident in the Lakota school district has an obligation to defend their homes and property from the clutches of big government spenders like superintendent Mantia. Failure to say no to them will result in the same kind of declining community as seen in present day Forest Park, Fairfield and many other places where high taxes and demographic changes have destroyed their communities. In Lakota, it is the targets of Mantia’s letter that make the community such a nice place, the restaurant owners, the developers, and the financiers. If they get frustrated with the tax rates and pick up to move, they will leave behind in Lakota a community with crushing tax rates yet no businesses to pay them, because nobody takes the risk of owning something without expected to earn money from it. The value of any money earned goes down with every tax increase. Communists, or those trained in the ways of communism have no value for money—they find themselves seeking government employment because that is the only place they can earn a decent living thinking the way they do. Superintendent Mantia does not understand business. She thinks because she gets a hand shake and a bit of idle chatter at a charity event from many of the people she sent that letter to, she is on good terms with them. But she’s not. What she gets is appeasement the way a person who gets pulled over by a cop tries to appease the cop so that they don’t end up in jail. Business owners want to keep the peace and the looters out of their pockets. Taxes like the one proposed for this November levy permanently change wealth, and gives business owners less money to invest in the community, and that is not a good thing.
The communists who devised this ridiculous plan knew what they were doing. They hated the rich, and sought to level the playing field in every endeavor. Most levy supporters when asked enough question will reflect the communist roots of their belief when they state that everyone could afford to pay just a bit more for the good of the children. Many of them will only pay $30 dollars more a month, and since they have kids in the school, it’s no big deal to them. It’s cheaper than driving their children to school if they are lucky enough to get busing back. They may cut one trip out to eat with their family a month, and pay their higher tax without further complaint. But for business owners with millions of dollars in assessed property value, they will be taxed much higher, and the levy supporters with much less personal value will directly benefit. It’s called confiscation of wealth by the needy majority, and it is a communist concept—and a sickening enterprise.
The school levy at Lakota and every other school district is simply a redistribution of wealth scam that uses children to fulfill a political agenda that as Darryl Parks stated, is unconstitutional. For the same reasons that superintendents like Lakota’s Mantia ignore Ohio Revised Code 3315.07, authorities under state control ignore the unconstitutional nature of the school levy system because they have allowed the monopoly of public education to dominate the political arena with a communist sentiment that belongs in Kazakhstan, not West Chester, Ohio. There is nothing good that comes out of tax increases, but everything bad—an element missing from Mantia’s letter. She likely has no idea what the people who she sent that letter to really think of her, and probably thinks they believe what she is saying as much as she does. But the difference between her and them is that they actually produce things, while she is just another government parasite, a worker living off the tax payers and again advocating more taxes so her ilk can sustain their unsustainable wages for a few more years. If there is no other reason to vote against a school levy anywhere in Ohio, it is because the concept is a flawed one that goes against everything America is supposed to stand for—capitalism. School levies are wealth redistribution attempts by progressive minds for aims that are not beneficial to thriving economies. And every one of them should be voted down because they won’t end in 2013. They will continue well into the future until there is no money left to loot and people finally say no because they have nothing left to give. For the sake of Lakota, and the community that feeds it, the NO VOTES need to come now, while there is still money being produced in an economy that is the envy of Ohio. Voting NO on the Lakota levy goes a long way to keeping that status.
Over the weekend Matt Clark asked me to do a radio segment based my blog series dedicated to The Naked Communist. CLICK HERE TO READ THE LATEST. Of course I agreed even though I was traveling, specifically in the heart of labor union country–Wisconsin. It was the perfect platform personally for me to do a radio interview as I had been thinking voraciously what the cost of communism brought to America through the labor union movement had been. The evidence was very easy to see in the blue-collar towns of Wisconsin. While traveling, a woman sat next to me and told me her life story even though it was quite clear to her that I was trying to read. She complained about air travel and how cramped the seats were, even as her girth was spilling over into my side. She complained that the airline companies just wanted to make “profits” by cramming as many people into the plane as they could—that it would make more sense to have more flights per day so people didn’t have to be so cramped. She then proceeded to declare that automotive travel wasn’t any better. Modern cars broke down too often and the car companies were greedy and only wanted “profits” and they were evil. I asked her what companies were supposed to stand for if not for profit, and she said that they should stand behind the people who work for them. I asked her where she was from, and she stated proudly with a bold Wisconsin accent…………..Madison—the birthplace of the labor movement and progressive party in America. I said, ah-ha, I understand now. She smiled a bit wondering what my reference indicated. I then asked her how she felt about communism—and she went on a half hour tirade about how her father fought against it in Vietnam, and she hung an American flag from her porch every day and was happy to see the communists fail in Russia. I listened with sadness as she had no idea that the roots of her thinking were fashioned from communism, and that she was a functioning collectivist shaped by progressive Wisconsin politics over the last century. It was in this context that I gave a very animated interview from my hotel room to Matt Clark during his Saturday radio show on WAAM in Ann Arbor. Watch and listen:
His wife Belle Case La Follette and sons Robert M. La Follette, Jr. and Philip La Follette led his political faction in Wisconsin into the 1940s. La Follette has been called “arguably the most important and recognized leader of the opposition to the growing dominance of corporations over the Government”[2] and is one of the key figures pointed to in Wisconsin‘s long history of political liberalism.
He is best remembered as a proponent of progressivism and a vocal opponent of railroad trusts, bossism, World War I, and the League of Nations. In 1957, a Senate Committee selected La Follette as one of the five greatest U.S. Senators, along with Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, John C. Calhoun, and Robert Taft. A 1982 survey asking historians to rank the “ten greatest Senators in the nation’s history” based on “accomplishments in office” and “long-range impact on American history,” placed La Follette first, tied with Henry Clay.[3]Robert La Follette is one of five outstanding senators memorialized by portraits in the Senate reception room in US Capitol. One of America’s top schools for public affairs, located at the University of Wisconsin-Madison bears his name.
From 1901 until 1906, La Follette served as Governor of Wisconsin. During his first term, he proposed to set up a railroad commission, imposed an ad valorem tax on the railroad companies, and established a direct primary system. The Stalwarts blocked his agenda, and he refused to compromise with them.
During the 1904 elections, the Stalwarts organized to oppose La Follette’s nomination and moved to block any reform legislation. La Follette began working to unite insurgent Democrats to form a broad coalition. He did manage to secure the passage of the primary bill and some revision to the railroad tax structure.[2]
When the legislative session concluded, La Follette traveled throughout Wisconsin reading the “roll call”; that is, he read the votes of Stalwart Republicans to the people in an effort to elect Progressives. During this campaign, La Follette gained national attention when muckraking journalist Lincoln Steffens began to cover his campaign.
With the press coverage and his successful re-election, La Follette rose to become a national figure. His message against “vast corporate combinations”[2] attracted more journalists and more progressives.
As governor, La Follette championed numerous progressive reforms, including the first workers’ compensation system, railroad rate reform, direct legislation, municipal home rule, open government, the minimum wage, non-partisan elections, the open primary system, direct election of U.S. Senators, women’s suffrage, and progressive taxation. He created an atmosphere of close cooperation between the state government and the University of Wisconsin in the development of progressive policy, which became known as the Wisconsin Idea. The goals of his policy included the recall, referendum, direct primary, and initiative. All of these were aimed at giving citizens a more direct role in government. The Wisconsin Idea promoted the idea of grounding legislation on thorough research and expert involvement. To implement this program, La Follette began working with University of Wisconsin–Madison faculty. This made Wisconsin a “laboratory for democracy” and “the most important state for the development of progressive legislation”.[2] As governor, La Follette signed legislation that created the Wisconsin Legislative Reference Library (now Bureau) to ensure that a research agency would be available for the development of legislation.
In 1911, La Follette set up a campaign to mobilize the progressive elements in the Republican Party behind his presidential bid. He made a disastrous speech in February 1912 before a gathering of leading magazine editors that caused many to doubt his stability.[12] Most of his supporters deserted him for Theodore Roosevelt[citation needed].
Embittered, La Follette opposed both Roosevelt and William Howard Taft in the 1912 election. When his former ally, Governor Francis E. McGovern, supported Roosevelt, La Follette broke with him, allowing the conservative Republicans under Emanuel Philipp to take control of Wisconsin in the decisive 1914 election. La Follette’s forces were out of power in the state from 1912 to 1920.[13]
In 1924, the Federated Farmer-Labor Party (FF-LP) sought to nominate La Follette as its candidate. The FF-LP sought to unite all progressive parties into a single national Labor Party.
However, after a bitter convention in 1923, the Communist-controlled Workers Party gained control of the national organization’s structure. Just prior to its 1924 convention in St. Paul, La Follette denounced the Communists and refused to be considered for the FF-LP endorsement. With La Follette’s snub, the FF-LP disintegrated, leaving only the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party.
Instead, La Follette formed an independent Progressive Party and accepted its nomination in Cleveland with Democratic Senator Burton K. Wheeler of Montana as his running mate. The American Federation of Labor, the Socialist Party of America, the Conference for Progressive Political Action and most of the former supporters of the FF-LP along with various former “Bull Moose” Progressives and Midwestern Progressive movement activists then joined La Follette and supported the Progressive Party. Many who today call themselves “progressives” sincerely trace their political roots to the Progressive Parties of Teddy Roosevelt, Henry Wallace or Robert La Follette, Sr. But many others on the left nowadays call themselves “progressives” as a deceptive euphemism for more precise, less popular words that describe their real political objectives and ideology – words such as “socialist,” “Marxist,” or “Communist.” Even through La Follette denounced the communists during the 1924 convention it was only politically that he separated from them, not ideologically. He did however attract the softer version of communism to his party affiliation in the American socialists.
Wisconsin as I traveled around it emitted the classic hope of the early 20th Century progressives—vast spans of middle-class residences, labor unions, and a generally anti-corporation mentality. Socialism was everywhere, even in the Green Bay Packer paraphernalia at the airport the only NFL team that is owned by “the people,” not a corporate owner. All money earned goes back into the club.
The Packers are deeply rooted in the Wisconsin city where they were founded in 1919. They were named after a local meat processing plant, the Indian Packing Company, which paid for the first uniforms. Starting in the 1920s, the Green Bay Football Corp. made a series of public stock offerings. In 1950, 1,900 local residents each put up $25 a share to buy the team.
From the Packers’ web site:
“Green Bay Packers, Inc., has been a publicly owned, non-profit corporation since Aug. 18, 1923, when original articles of incorporation were filed with Wisconsin’s secretary of state.
A total of 4,750,937 shares are owned by 112,120 stockholders — none of whom receives any dividend on the initial investment.
The corporation is governed by a board of directors and a seven-member executive committee.
One of the more remarkable business stories in American history, the team is kept viable by its shareholders — its unselfish fans. Even more incredible, the Packers have survived during the current era, permeated by free agency and the NFL salary cap. And, thanks in large part to Brown County’s passage of the 2000 Lambeau Field referendum, the club will remain solvent and highly competitive well into the future due to its redeveloped stadium.
Fans have come to the team’s financial rescue on several occasions, including four previous stock sales: 1923, 1935, 1950 and 1997.
To protect against someone taking control of the team, the articles of incorporation prohibit any person from owning more than 200,000 shares.”
Silently, many who profess to see communism work in America look at teams like the Green Bay Packers and the progressivism of Wisconsin as hope that socialism and communism will still work. Not long after my radio interview with Matt, which became quite animated at times, I had the profound desire to return to Florida and bask in the capitalism of the Disney World complex. Wisconsin and the people there were too bleak and small-minded for me. They were friendly, but dramatically philosophically limited which was evident in gross abundance by the small town cafes and general business climate. If not for their dependence on the federal government, their social experiments into communism through the mask of progressivism would have failed long ago. Suddenly I am a massive Scott Walker fan as it gives me hope that Wisconsin residents are just now pushing away their history of communist acceptance through Robert La Follette, Sr’s progressive party. As for the woman on the plane with me, she was the kind of person that Matt and I spoke about……..her foundation beliefs were rooted in communism, only she didn’t know it. She believed falsely, just like the union brothers of Wisconsin, home of the Harley Davidson motorcycle and the dream quest of traveling to Sturgis every August on a freedom driven pilgrimage. The labor unions and collective ownership the unions, and Harley riders generally subscribe to are experiments in communism advocated by 20th Century politics implemented before the Cold War with the Soviet Union.
There was almost nothing I liked about Wisconsin. I was never so happy to board an airplane as I was upon leaving. When the wheels left the runway, and the plane moved into the sky, I could feel the oppressive pull of socialism drifting away beneath my feet. As I looked through the window down at the rows and rows of middle-class homes stacked in rows of uniformity I could have been looking down upon a small European town also infected with socialism—soft core communism. The persistence of that socialism doesn’t dissipate until just south of Chicago where Indiana is now a right-to-work state and Ohio at least outside of Cleveland still embraces capitalism. I didn’t argue with the woman, I just listened to her while trying to read my book. She was a mixed up concoction of many political ideologies given to her by years of public education, left-winged controlled media empires, and unionized neighbors who falsely believe they are American patriots just because they stick a flag on the back of their Harley Davidson motorcycle—built in Wisconsin by union workers supporting their publicly owned football team, the Green Bay Packers. Wisconsin is the result of what The Naked Communist warned about, the continued experiment into socialism at the expense of capitalism and a state I am eager to see turn away eventually from the communism of the labor movement and an embrace into the kind of capitalism that drives the rest of America. It is time to close the book on the dark days of communism in America so to save the mind of the poor people of Wisconsin from a doomed philosophy that has left them ignorantly blissful from their lowered expectations and contorted patriotism.
What was the government shutdown all about? What are the Republicans fighting against and why were the Democrats so intent to hold their line? President Obama made many speeches during the debates of October 2013, and all of them had a general theme that Republicans were not allowed to shut down the government just to get what they wanted—which was an end to socialized medicine known as Obamacare. The media turned against the GOP in predictable ways and pundits went immediately to work supporting President Obama. There was never a mention by the press that the same tactic the GOP was using to hold up the destructive implementation of Obamacare was the same tactic used by labor unions who strike often to “get what they want” and support President Obama exclusively. In the end, the GOP caved and Obama advanced the communist position that is the wind in his sales more to the political left fulfilling further advancement of the 45 Planks of Communism that were outlined in the warning book from 1958 called The Naked Communist.This article is part of a running series I’m doing on the intended strategy communists intentionally inflicted on America to destroy capitalism and by the evidence presented during the shutdown, the effectiveness of communist planks 18, 19, 20, and 21 are easy to see. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW PAST ARTICLES. What we are seeing right now is the result of a communist attack that started in the 1930s, and occurred so slow that nobody paid attention as the names were changed to “progressivism” from open communism. Obamacare and President Obama are communists. It doesn’t matter what they call themselves, their behavior is exactly the same as the terrible communists of yesteryear, and their rise to power in The White House was made possible by the following Planks from that old book.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy making positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
Ayn Rand, tried to warn America along with Walt Disney, John Wayne, Gary Cooper and many others that communism was doing exactly what Communist Plank 21 stated, and infiltrating itself into the motion picture industry. CLICK HERE TO READ A VERY REVEALING DOCUMENT FROM THE TIME. Back then those film producers and actors were the mainstream, and Senator McCarthy represented a portion of America that felt similarly, and they saw communism as a major threat to American sovereignty. The communists won against McCarthy the same way that they won against the GOP, and eventually John Wayne, Walt Disney and everyone else standing behind Ayn Rand’s Motion Picture Guide designed to root out communists. They were defeated by public sentiment. That public sentiment was shaped by the communists capture of the above planks. The victor defines history, and communism won behind the lines during the 1950’s so by the time Ayn Rand published her Screen Guide for Americans it was already over. McCarthy was too late, the communist philosophy had already penetrated the American culture and was able to shape the Senator as a radical traditionalist through the media establishment firmly trained in communism.
I have written about how Ronald Reagan in his younger days actually applied for communist membership. He did it well before he ever thought of being President of The United States because during the Red Decade of the 1930s communism was a fashion trend that was all the rage. CLICK HERE FOR PROOF. Reagan was the head of his labor union at the time and all his fellow actors were advocating the benefits of communism at their Hollywood parties. Ayn Rand, Disney and Wayne had firsthand knowledge of this activity which is why Rand wrote her “Guide.” Reagan played along as a strapping young leading man in movies thinking it was just innocent fun, until he made a film in England and saw the devastating effects socialism had on the English economy. That was when he became a Republican and began building a career as a spokesman for GE honing himself for a governor race, and eventually President—attacking communism, instead of trying to join it. It was one of the causes of his divorce from his first wife who continued to run with the “in” Hollywood crowd hell-bent on communism. A few years later, communism was everywhere, only they changed the name after the McCarthy hearings to avoid going to jail as members of the Hollywood Ten did.
The Hollywood blacklist—as the broader entertainment industry blacklist is generally known—was the mid-20th-century practice of denying employment to screenwriters, actors, directors, musicians, and other U.S. entertainment professionals because of their suspected political beliefs or associations. Artists were barred from work on the basis of their alleged membership in or sympathy with the American Communist Party, involvement in progressive political causes that enforcers of the blacklist associated with communism, and refusal to assist investigations into Communist Party activities. Even during the period of its strictest enforcement, the late 1940s through the late 1950s, the blacklist was rarely made explicit and verifiable, but it caused direct damage to the careers of scores of individuals working in the film industry.
The first systematic Hollywood blacklist was instituted on November 25, 1947, the day after ten writers and directors were cited for contempt of Congress for refusing to give testimony to the House Committee on Un-American Activities. A group of studio executives, acting under the aegis of the Motion Picture Association of America, announced the firing of the artists—the so-called Hollywood Ten—in what has become known as the Waldorf Statement. On June 22, 1950, a pamphlet called Red Channels appeared, focusing on the field of broadcasting. It named 151 entertainment industry professionals in the context of “Red Fascists and their sympathizers”; soon most of those named, along with a host of other artists, were barred from employment in much of the entertainment field. The blacklist was effectively broken in 1960 when Dalton Trumbo, an unrepentant member of the Hollywood Ten, was publicly acknowledged as the screenwriter of the films Spartacus and Exodus. A number of those blacklisted, however, were still barred from work in their professions for years afterward.
Joseph Raymond “Joe” McCarthy (November 14, 1908 – May 2, 1957) was an American politician who served as a RepublicanU.S. Senator from the state of Wisconsin from 1947 until his death in 1957. Beginning in 1950, McCarthy became the most visible public face of a period in which Cold War tensions fueled fears of widespread Communistsubversion.[1] He was noted for making claims that there were large numbers of Communists and Soviet spies and sympathizers inside the United States federal government and elsewhere. Ultimately, his tactics and inability to substantiate his claims led him to be censured by the United States Senate.
The term McCarthyism, coined in 1950 in reference to McCarthy’s practices, was soon applied to similar anti-communist activities. Today the term is used more generally in reference to demagogic, reckless, and unsubstantiated accusations, as well as public attacks on the character or patriotism of political opponents.[2]
Regardless of what anyone thinks of McCarthy, of his sanity, of his alcoholism, of his credibility, it was obvious that he had an unfiltered fear of communism as he observed it in his day. He fought what he thought was a good and valiant fight for the future of America. To measure against there is a new blacklist in Hollywood and the roles have been reversed. It is now nearly exclusively progressives who run the show as conservatives tread shallow water and only if they have large box office ability. The communists had already gained strong enough positions that they could shape public sentiment against McCarthy. By the end of his hearings, McCarthy had taken a beating that still resonates to this day among Republicans afraid of being thrown in with the radicalism of McCarthy. It is one of the Democrats primary weapons against Republicans to paint them as radicals like McCarthy forcing members of the GOP to prove otherwise. That strategy is one designed by communism through planks 18-21.
(Have any doubts? Watch this whole thing. Grab a snack…………………and listen carefully)
The current debt crises is an intentional breaking of the American capitalist system as communist trained minds functioning as progressives and Democrats seek to implement soft socialism leading to communism at every opportunity. In that fight Republicans are continuously disarmed as they still try to distance themselves from politicians like Senator McCarthy and the modern Senator Ted Cruz. Even if those politicians come off sounding as kooks, the definition of kookiness was molded by the modern media which has been infiltrated with communist thought renamed “progressive.” McCarthy and Cruz may be 100% correct in their assertions, but the way their facts were communicated to the public remains under the control of communist planks 18-21 so the public sentiment in a majority will always be against them. This is why communists sought to take control of the student newspapers, invoke riots among student populations, gain control of the media in every way possible—so that the communists could shape the way tomorrow viewed their philosophy of collectivism with a favorable light.
Now watch this if you dare!
Obamacare is communism. Bill O’Reilly is wrong to suggest that it is OK to allow Obamacare to be implemented and once it is, the people under democratic rule will elect politicians to repeal it. The intention of communists is not to give health care to poor people as it is proposed, and defended by Fox News commentators like O’Reilly. The intention is to make more poor people to act as foot soldiers against society overwhelming the system so to destroy American capitalism. Obamacare seeks to gain control of the American economy and once they have it, they don’t intend to let it go. Their plot is the result many years of planning and Obamacare was their aim. So they won’t let it go without a major fight—a fight that cannot be won playing nice. Only a series of strong patriots more radical than Senator McCarthy, wiser than Ayn Rand, more charismatic than Walt Diseny, and more representative of the alpha male than John Wayne can have a crack at defeating these American communists who are now as common as grains of sand upon a vast beach—the fight will be a bloody one, metaphorically, and physically, but it must take place if capitalism is to survive. Because the communists have always intended for capitalism to perish, and they penetrated the media through communist planks 18-21 to achieve their tactical aims.
There is 100% without any doubt what-so-ever that communism infiltrated American public schools for most of the 20th Century, making an extraordinary push in the 60s and 70s. Once The Department of Education was formed in 1979 it was already too late, but even still it was reported that even under the Reagan White House, a communist plot was being hatched to teach communism to American students. The reports crossed President Reagan’s desk—so he knew about it. CLICK HERE FOR PROOF. At the start of his presidency Reagan vowed to put an end to Jimmy Carter’s Department of Education, but never gained the political clout to do so. After the assassination attempt on Reagan and his massive tax cuts to get the economy started again, he had gambled all his political capital at the time, leaving The Department of Education to become further entrenched. He was at the time at war with Russia and communism was the declared enemy as it was the cause of the Vietnam conflict, the near tragedy in Cuba, countless insurgents in Central America and of course the space race with Russia. The hatred for communism is what advanced NASA into formation and put man on the moon as a declaration of capitalism. So Reagan surely wasn’t surprised by the reports that crossed his desk announcing open communism was the aim of American schools organized under the department of education. This brings us to the latest and one of the most devastating of the 45 Planks of Communism from the 1958 book The Naked Communist, which is being covered here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom plank by plank. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW ALL 45 OF THEM. #17 is probably the most dangerous plank of them all—and one that is most obvious today.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
Be sure to watch the videos on this site as supplemental material to this text from top to bottom, it tells a story. It is very important. I have the very unique position of growing up during a time when all this was happening, coupled with an unusually clear photographic memory extending back to age two. I can still remember smells, facial expressions, sentence construction, etc., of events from my first couple years of grade school even with the logic filters turned on that comes with age. Without knowing what communism was, I determined as far back as the first grade that the entire system was wrong and that it should be rejected. My teachers in grades kindergarten, first grade, second grade and third grade all had conferences with my mother trying to put pressure on me to conform to classroom politics, which I simply refused, instinctively. I didn’t know why, only that I should. I was paddled, given detentions, grounded, isolated and pulled in every direction imaginable, but I never yielded not even an ounce—and I am very, very proud of that fact today. The year I was in the second grade it was the bicentennial year of 1976 and our teachers allowed all the students to celebrate by dressing up as Revolutionary War heroes, as The Department of Education had not yet been created which would eventually aim to put an end to such patriotic endeavors. Our second grade teacher took us to the little school-house on Princeton Road, the old single classroom building Hughes which was being restored at the time to study up on the Declaration of Independence and American Constitution. I remember thinking then that the formation of public schools was wrong in the methods they were using to teach. But I didn’t question it too much as I was watching Little House on the Prairie during Monday evenings with my mother and saw the schools in America had pretty much always been the same way, top down collectivism that was strictly contingent upon the quality of the teacher. If the teacher was a bad one, the entire class would suffer. On the rare times that the teacher was exceptional, a small percentage of the children in the class might find something unlocked within them and become better. They entire system seemed inefficient and wrong to me.
The #1 reason a man wishes to sleep with his best friend’s wife, or the reason a man might be hired, or otherwise coerced to seduce the wife of a rival is so that the value of the love the man shares with his wife will be weakened—hopefully weakening the man—(the husband). When one man sleeps with another man’s claim on a bed partner, he displays power over the man who made the commitment. When the husband learns about the penetration of his sacred love nest by another man’s phallic presence, that woman will become tainted to him—likely forever. The love union between the husband and wife will become forever weakened and any products of that marriage will began to erode away. The process doesn’t happen quickly, but over time, often taking many years. The only defense the husband has is if he is aware of the nature of the attack and can find a way to deal with it. This is the nature of nearly all the fantasies that are carried out all too often when men seduce the bed partners of their rivals, and this includes rivals within the family, brothers, sisters, step parents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. The act of sex in these cases is similar to the ancient belief that in cannibalism, if the heart of an enemy was eaten, then some of the power of that enemy would transfer over to the attacker and he’d become more powerful. Modern men, if they wish to diminish other men, attempt to do so through the women those men love, and if successful, can crush the rival directly and indirectly.
The KGB wished to taint the American education system in the same way that one man wishes to sleep with a rival’s wife. Using communism to infiltrate the ideals taught to the next generation of children it would plant the seeds of discontent in the mind of the participants. The same way a woman who has been seduced by another man, her husband’s rival might find herself beginning to question the power, intelligence, and potency of her husband after allowing herself to open up to another man, the unarmed young American student once invoked with communism will forever question the merits of capitalism.
From the fifth, through the tenth grade I found myself perplexed by the term “Let’s Party” which was so incredibly popular in public school, as almost every kid I knew used the term. For reasons I couldn’t put my finger on at the time, I avoided such terms because they seemed contrived—foreign, and I wanted nothing to do with them. I certainly would not have guessed that the American enemy at the time, Russia had originated the term. After all I was at the opening night of Rocky IV and it was all about the capitalism of Rocky fighting the mechanical nature of communism in the boxing ring. At the movie theater seemingly my entire school had shown up, the theater was one of the really big ones at Showcase Cinemas, and it was packed. My date was a highly sought after young woman a few years older than me who was dating a Bengal player and was the next door neighbor to one of my best friends—and male rivals. I knew exactly what I was doing by taking her on a date to see Rocky IV. The Bengal player got over it but my friend never did. During the Rocky movie, communism was defined as the villain. It was clear, but all the kids I grew up with missed the real villain. Nearly all of them after the movie concluded declared one place or another as the destination for their term, “Let’s Party,” which is what they did. They gathered in groups of eight or more became increasingly intoxicated—non thinking, loose sexually, and displayed their vulnerabilities to each other openly. I of course avoided those kinds of entanglements and took my date elsewhere. But the entire evening I kept hearing the term “Let’s Party” and found myself disheveled by the phrase for reasons that were purely instinctual.
There is no hesitation on my part in declaring that Communist Plank #17 has been fully implemented, and it goes unsaid the same way a couple avoids discussing their sexual mistakes of the past, or lovers that they had shared a bed with outside of their relationship. Communism has tainted our education system deliberately and the shame of it keeps everyone from talking about it. So much time has passed that teachers of Common Core, Race to the Top, and virtually every curriculum in The United States find themselves preaching soft communism, or open socialism to American children thinking that they are teaching “American” ideals. But they’re not. They are teaching communism disguised with seductive terminology such as “social justice,” “fairness,” “equality,” and other communist expressions decorated under the flag of Democratic politics, supported by a progressive label. I know it’s true because I personally watched it happen step by step and had the unique aptitude to chronicle it from a very young age and never become seduced by it. This has allowed me to name the villain because shame does not keep it off my tongue.
I wasn’t sure how serious the situation truly was regarding communism being taught in public schools until I read We The Living. Before that book I was searching for answers and everything came back insufficient to explain the problems I was observing. But after We The Living, I realized that what the communists of the 20th Century had performed was a global infiltration of the philosophy of Karl Marx and put it into the minds of nearly every student using stolen tax money to commit the crime. The situation is actually much worse than I thought; it is a thing of nightmares. Communism in public education is not a conspiracy, it is a fact. The evidence is clear and it puts every child taught under that system in danger. When I spoke about the Rocky movie of my youth, it is true that most of those partiers went on to live somewhat normal lives, raise families, maintain jobs, and own property becoming good American citizens—at least compared to other people on planet earth. But I can declare that the theater at the time in the old Showcase Cinema had well over 300 people in it on that night and of all those including my date, maybe only one or two have lived fruitful lives into their 40s and 50s without massive amounts of destruction brought upon them because of their acceptance of social collectivism. Most of their high blood pressure medicine, their need for Viagra, and the many failures they stare at in the mirror every morning can be traced back to their teenage years and their utterance of the term, “Let’s Party,” which was given to them by 1926 Petrograd, the communist export of the newly formed U.S.S.R. And the kids of today are much, much, much worse off.
Just asking your children dear reader what they learned in school today, and you will see the aims of communism coming out in their report. Forget the modern names given, study the content, and you will see the truth. Think of the wolf in sheep’s clothing. The disguise is meant to deceive, and communists have performed such a deception hiding behind the term, progressive.
To prove that America has long been infiltrated with communism as stated in the 1958 book The Naked Communist I am covering each of the 45 Planks of Communism cited there to provide the proof. CLICK HERE TO READ THE LATEST INSTALLMENT. When it is understood to what extent communism has been quietly placed into our culture during a very delicate time in American history, it can then be understood what is happening to the world in the modern age. So let us explore the meaning of Plank # 16 shown below.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
Over the last 30 years American society has been under siege mysteriously by a rash of court cases driven by money grabbing lawyers hungry to charge $300-$500 per hour to their clients. The lawyers learned their tactics during their law degrees by professors already trained in the ways of communism—only under different names. Any doctrine that embraces collectivism over individuality has its roots in communist propaganda planted generations before even the law professors received their educations, so the concepts of communism were taught without naming the name allowing entire generations of young lawyers to advance communism thought thinking they were actually fighting for civil liberties. This has resulted in court cases removing the Ten Commandments from public places, allowed defiling art to attack symbols of American heritage, and created many millions of pages of case-law in civil rights litigation that have shaped our society to such a radical position that children are presently suspended from school just for making the shape of a gun with their hands. The meaning behind such measures is fear from law suits leaving public schools to over-react from fear of parasitic lawyers that might bring lawsuits should a school shooting erupt. The communist intention of the law to begin with was to attack the concept of the Second Amendment so that children would grow up in a world not accepting the use of personal firearms. The school was not devious in suspending the students for pretending to shoot other students in normal games of “cops and robbers” they were simply protecting themselves from the potential of future lawsuits. But it was lawyers who created the case-law which provoked such a fear in the first place and the roots of that desire came from Communist Plank #16.
To prove the validity of the claim made by the book The Naked Communist one only need to look at the ability of the organization known as NAMBLA to rise to prominence and use the American courts through the ACLU. NAMBLA is openly wrong, and unquestionably evil, yet it is advanced and defended publically as a way to attack the First Amendment by pretending to defend it. NAMBLA is a byproduct of the International Lesbian and Gay Association which is supported by The United Nations and is protected by politicians like Hillary Clinton. Working together, these organizations have openly attacked American tradition by seeking to twist The Bill of Rights legally to invoke public hatred for those same Rights. This was the intention of communist infiltration of the legal system specifically targeting civil rights.
The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) is a pedophile and pederasty advocacy organization in the United States that works to abolish age of consent laws criminalizing adult sexual involvement with minors,[1][2] and for the release of all men who have been jailed for sexual contacts with minors that did not involve coercion.[1][3] Some reports state that the group no longer has regular national meetings, and that as of the late 1990s, to avoid local police infiltration, the organization discouraged the formation of local chapters.[3][4] Around 1995, an undercover detective discovered that there were 1,100 people on the rolls.[3] As of 2005, a newspaper report stated that NAMBLA was based in New York and San Francisco.[3]
In 1993, the International Lesbian and Gay Association achieved United Nations consultative status. NAMBLA’s membership in ILGA drew heavy criticism and caused the suspension of ILGA. Many gay organizations called for the ILGA to dissolve ties with NAMBLA. Republican Senator Jesse Helms proposed a bill to withhold $119 million in UN contributions until U.S. President Bill Clinton could certify that “no UN agency grants any official status, accreditation, or recognition to any organization which promotes, condones, or seeks the legalization of pedophilia, that is, the sexual abuse of children”. The bill was unanimously approved by Congress and signed into law by Clinton in April 1994.
IN 1994, ILGA expelled NAMBLA and two other groups (MARTIJN and Project Truth) because they were judged to be “groups whose predominant aim is to support or promote pedophilia.” Although ILGA removed NAMBLA, the UN reversed its decision to grant ILGA special consultative status. Repeated attempts by ILGA to reacquire special status with the UN were eventually successful in 2006.[23]
Gregory King of the Human Rights Campaign later said that “NAMBLA is not a gay organization … They are not part of our community and we thoroughly reject their efforts to insinuate that pedophilia is an issue related to gay and lesbian civil rights.”[24] NAMBLA responded by claiming that “man/boy love is by definition homosexual,” that “man/boy lovers are part of the gay movement and central to gay history and culture,” and that “homosexuals denying that it is ‘not gay’ to be attracted to adolescent boys are just as ludicrous as heterosexuals saying it’s ‘not heterosexual’ to be attracted to adolescent girls.”[24]
In 2000, a Boston couple, Robert and Barbara Curley, sued NAMBLA for the wrongful death of their son. According to the plaintiffs, Charles Jaynes and Salvatore Sicari, who were convicted of murdering the Curleys’ son Jeffrey, “stalked … tortured, murdered and mutilated [his] body on or about October 1, 1997. Upon information and belief immediately prior to said acts Charles Jaynes accessed NAMBLA’s website at the Boston Public Library.”[8] The lawsuit further alleged that “NAMBLA serves as a conduit for an underground network of pedophiles in the United States who use their NAMBLA association and contacts therein and the Internet to obtain and promote pedophile activity.”[8] Jaynes wrote in his diary, “This was a turning point in discovery of myself…. NAMBLA’s Bulletin helped me to become aware of my own sexuality and acceptance of it […].”[25]
Citing cases in which NAMBLA members have been convicted of sexual offenses against children, Larry Frisoli, the attorney representing the Curleys, argued that it is a “training ground” for adults who wish to seduce children, in which men exchange strategies on how to find and groom child sex partners. Frisoli also claimed that NAMBLA has sold at its website what he called “The Rape and Escape Manual” that detailed how to avoid being caught and prosecuted.[26] The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) stepped in to defend NAMBLA as a free speech matter and won a dismissal based on the fact that NAMBLA is organized as an unincorporated association, not a corporation. John Reinstein, the director of the ACLU Massachusetts, said that although NAMBLA “may extol conduct which is currently illegal”, there was nothing on its website that “advocated or incited the commission of any illegal acts, including murder or rape”.[27]
The Curleys continued the suit as a wrongful death action against individual NAMBLA members, some of whom were active in the group’s leadership. The targets of the wrongful death suits included David Thorstad, a co-founder of NAMBLA. The Curleys alleged that Jaynes and Sicari, who were convicted of the rape and murder of their son, were members.[citation needed] The lawsuit was dropped in April 2008 after a judge ruled that a key witness was not competent to testify.[28]
As a result of the existence of NAMBLA which started in 1978 there are countless rapists, pedophiles, and sexual deviants that have been allowed to openly express themselves which directly attacks the moral aptitude of America. Communists knew that if the American people could no longer differentiate between right and wrong they would lose their way and fall to the collectivism of communism by default seeking safety in numbers. The attack against American civil liberties through the mask of defense was to frighten, outrage, and move patriotic sentiment away from The Constitution, and toward social collectivism opening the psychological door to communism.
In this way lawyers have been used to destroy the American family through easy divorce legislation, cases where schools can infringe upon family through inference, and children are not even allowed to make certain shapes with their hands so to quell the sentiments of the collective society. Individuality has been attacked for the “greater good,” and the cases that paved the way were those centering around NAMBLA—which were so extreme that once accepted, case-law allowed the book of interpretation to be opened widely so that right and wrong behavior were no longer applicable.
This has always been the intention of Communist Plank #16, and the result is all around American society today. It is the cause as to why most people simply shake their head in bewilderment when they hear the latest atrocities on the nightly news and seek collective activities of association to protect their fragile minds from further imposition. The intention of global communists during the 40s and 50s were to bring to the next century in America a nation that had no moral ground to stand upon allowing communism to penetrate the borders of capitalism and destroy it forever. Capitalism is an economic system where the morally good tends to succeed over the bad, so judgments of value must be removed before communism can be accepted by mass society. The intention of Plank #16 was to achieve this eradication of value so that communist driven economies could flourish in the open with no other options of acceptance available and the path to that behavior has been paved through the open attack of value through American civil liberties by organizations like NAMBLA.
Leadership contrary to 4000 years of military action is not defined by how dependent a force of any kind is upon a solitary commander, but how well that force functions without direct input. Many years ago a rival attempted to place doubt about my beliefs on leadership with the simple question—“how do you know you are a great leader?” My response was, “if an organization can function without my input, then I know I’ve been a good leader.” This of course set off the rival into a downward spiral of anger that precipitated his immediate demise—and rivalry with me. Little did he know that my thoughts on leadership were shaped by many years of studying Bruce Lee’s martial art concept Jeet Kun Do where the primary function of adaptability is to behave in martial combat like water—taking the shape of whatever the battlefield conditions present, and using that form to defeat the enemy maintaining continuous evolutions driven by circumstance.
With all that said, I am very proud of No Lakota Levy. They have a wonderful presence in 2013 and as all the tax levy supporters around Lakota have come to see, especially once they read Today’s Pulse this week and see all the wonderful graphs that are coming out—the same ones seen here—they are a stronger group now than they have ever been. Without question this will leave the pro levy factions of Lakota schools mystified, as they thought they had the strategy all figured out. But where they failed is that they identified what they thought was the battlefield generals and attempted to remove them with traditional politics—but traditional politics were not the strategy being implemented—and their tactics have solidified the voting base against them, not weakened it.
This begs the question that I’m sure Lakota is asking after seeing the signs beginning to roll out, the advertising presence in the newspapers, and the endless supply of commentators who are available to answer questions to the media—and the new website that has just been professionally updated for this new campaign. Who is No Lakota Levy?
No Lakota Levy is not one person that will show up on a donor list in the newspaper allowing political opponents to target them with extortion. Most of the No Lakota Levy people are under the radar and wish to stay that way because they have to rub shoulders publically with many of the levy supporters—so they wish to keep their involvement quiet. They support the foundation of No Lakota Levy in other ways that are not traditional, to save themselves of the grief that levy supporters aim to inflict against them for not voting for higher taxes.
The design of No Lakota Levy was built on the strategy of Jeet Kune Do. I don’t mind revealing this because I hope that both sides of political engagement will learn something from it. For the school levy fighters out there who have allowed themselves to be picked to pieces by the statist controls of the labor movement, I hope that Jeet Kune Do will allow them to learn how to defeat their enemies. Because if they do, they will save me a lot of time, and effort. The number one failure that levy fighters fall victim to is that they allow the levy fight to become all about them—as they fall in love with the attention they get when being on the front line. If they learn the ways of Jeet Kune Do, they will learn how to become like water, and defeat their enemies without actually fighting. Bruce Lee built his philosophy based on Sun Tzu’s The Art of War and this is the pinnacle concept explored in that marvelous book on strategy. For my enemies, I don’t mind letting them know something of my strategy because if they study Jeet Kune Do, they have a chance at becoming better people, and then—and only then—they may cease being my enemies.
Jeet Kune Do (also “Jeet Kun Do“, or simply “JKD“) is an eclectic/hybrid style of no style and philosophy of life founded by martial artist Bruce Lee[2] with direct, non-classical, and straightforward movements. Due to the way his style works, Jeet Kune Do practitioners believe in minimal movement with maximum effect and extreme speed. The system works on the use of different ‘tools’ for different situations. These situations are broken down into ranges (kicking, punching, trapping and grappling), with techniques flowing smoothly between them. It is referred to as a “style without style” or “the art of fighting without fighting” as said by Lee himself. Unlike more traditional martial arts, Jeet Kune Do is not fixed or patterned, and is a philosophy with guiding thoughts. It was named for the concept of interception, or attacking your opponent while he is about to attack. However, the name Jeet Kune Do was often said by Lee to be just a name. He himself often referred to it as “The art of expressing the human body” in his writings and in interviews. Through his studies Lee came to believe that styles had become too rigid, and unrealistic. He called martial art competitions of the day “Dry land swimming”. He believed that combat was spontaneous, and that a martial artist cannot predict it, only react to it, and that a good martial artist should “Be like water” and move fluidly without hesitation.
I learned about Jeet Kune Do though my studies of mythology and philosophy of the East. Although I do not agree with the collective tendencies of the East, I do admire their work ethic, and ability to deal with catastrophe. Shinto Buddhism is particularly effective as a religious and personal philosophy for overcoming personal travesties. Out of all modern martial artists, Bruce Lee was one of the most spectacular. I studied him in developing my own techniques to be used with the use of the bullwhip.
Martial art weapons such as nunchukas, knives and swords are traditional with Eastern study, but for my interest firmly placed in the West, it is the bullwhip, which is far superior to all Eastern weapons that placed me at the door of Jeet Kune Do. As all martial art masters understand, it is best to win fights before the other side even knows there is a conflict—and the mastery of such methods requires an ability to understand how to project targets before anybody else is aware of them. The key to Jeet Kune Do is winning the fight before the other side knows that there was an attack. Practicing with bullwhips has trained my mind to see targets and project their trajectories physically, and metaphorically.
Unlike the Saul Alinsky methods used by the levy radicals of big government which uses mobster tactics of mass, and fear to invoke change, Jeet Kune Do is a method of martial art that leaves Saul Alingsky’s radicalism defenseless. With No Lakota Levy it is not Rich Hoffman that carries the movement; it is not Mark Sennet, or a group of business developers who don’t want to pay higher taxes. No Lakota Levy strategically has been set up on the premise of Jeet Kune Do as opposed to Saul Alinsky, which guides the Pro Levy Movement. No Lakota Levy still exists even after pro levy supporters attempted to use traditional methods to destroy the leadership base. No Lakota Levy still exists even after a two-year cease-fire where pro levy supporters hoped that time would curb tensions and nurse the community back to sleep. No Lakota Levy is the actual spirit of the Lakota community that remembers the area when it was founded on post Revolutionary War sentiment, and was settled by rugged individualist, farmers, and hell-raisers who do not care for the recent progressive oriented New Englanders who migrated here to work at large businesses sent by transfers from the coasts. No Lakota Levy is as old and mature as the ghosts of ScreamingBridge, reminding the entire community of the principles that founded the area and it will rise up in any form to defend itself from statist scum bags and communist trained minds shaped by Cold War politics.
I am proud to see No Lakota Levy rise formless and deeply supported with a structure that resembles Jeet Kune Do’s martial style. It is like water that fills whatever glass that is there to hold it. It does not need top down leadership because it is the actual spirit of Liberty Township and West Chester which drives it—and it will be around long after Lakota, county commissioners, trustees, presidents, or congressmen have come and gone many times over. No Lakota Levy will still exist in a formless void to attack ghostlike any threat to the freedom of the community which decides to present itself. The people who support No Lakota Levy know and understand that. CLICK HERE FOR AN EXAMPLE.
Victory is won before the fight ever happens most of the time. And this victory is already won. All people need to do now is show up and fight by casting their ballot on Election Day and the rest will take care of itself. Formlessness is the key to victory, and the way to destroy the methods of Saul Alinsky and his levy whores of statism. No Lakota Levy will continue to be a force as a rotation of many different names will circulate through it to keep it fluid and effective depending on the strategic needs of the martial action. Without getting too formal on my current and future plans it should be noted that The Blaze as a news source has nearly 19 million unique visitors and is utilizing a strategy very similar to Jeet Kune Do. Glenn Beck has been the power behind that growth, yet over time many more voices have stepped in to carry The Blaze to levels of social and political influence that will pave the way for all news in the world of tomorrow. The reason that is significant is because I’m friends with one of those voices, and we have plans that involve a great deal of Jeet Kune Do. Nobody will be able to stop it because it will hit with the force of a tsunami that starts deep in the ocean and isn’t detected until it hits a land mass. Meanwhile, No Lakota Levy will still be there to protect the Lakota residents from the ominous tentacles of government employees who wish to crush property ownership and destroy the minds of all its children. To know that, it is needed to understand Jeet Kune Do and the power of being “fluid” like water. And I do not concern myself with worry revealing to my enemies my strategy………….because they have already lost…………so it’s already too late. The metaphorical tsunami is coming…………and they won’t vote in favor of school levies.
This is a continuing series done here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom analyzing the 45 Planks of Communism unleashed to the public in the 1958 book The Naked Communist. You can see the entire list by CLICKING HERE.You can also read the last article in the series by CLICKING HERE. The easiest way to understand how communists think is to read Ayn Rand’s We The Living, which takes place in 1924, roughly 7 years after the Russian Revolution and follows several families through their struggle to cope with the rise of the U.S.S.R as a communist political force, which would continue until Russia ran out of money in the 1990’s. But up until the last day, the communist cause was to infiltrate the entire world philosophically, not literally. Communists did not intend to win everyone over to their side by forcing the hammer and sickle down their throats in broad daylight. They had learned the error of their ways in implementing communism too quickly in Petrograd—and intended to carry those lessons with amendments to their world-wide campaign to spread social collectivism to every corner of planet earth.
Communists, particularly in the 1970’s and 1980’s were very arrogant about their beliefs. They believed in the greater good, so did not care if they came across individually as arrogant, or hurting the feelings of people since their focus was on collectivism. In the previous articles explained here it is clear that communists sought to use The United Nations as a platform to carry them through economic collapse—which was evident to them. They knew it was coming, so they sought to gather up the wealth of those functioning under capitalism until their philosophic enemy had been plucked dry. Then and only then did they believe communism would work, when it was the ONLY political philosophy left in the world.
Two years ago I would not have believed any of this were possible, but during my research into why public schools were so insanely destructive—economically, the only answer that has come back out of all my research is that they had been penetrated by communism with small doses of socialism until after a couple of generations nobody could not even see the difference—even the employees. We will get into this topic in much greater detail in a future article. Also over the years I have known many politicians, both local and national. It was last summer when a local politician was very upset with me for calling his kind RINO’s, (Republican In Name Only) that I realized there was something much more serious going on. The anger was not just in the name, but in the realization that there was truth to it, and the prospect of the accusation was simply too great for the guy. He was mad not just at me for seeing it, but for making him question it in himself. The foundation of everything this politician believed had been shaken to its very core, and he was having a crises. That crisis was the knowledge that the ideals of Abraham Lincoln, Calvin Coolidge, Thomas Jefferson and even Ronald Reagan were gone from the Republican Party as far as philosophy. Too many modern Republicans had found themselves caught in “making deals” to keep the peace against radicals from the other party and they had lost their way–they realized too late the nature of the attack against them. Communists had infiltrated the Democratic Party in every way that McCarthy feared—and once the public relation machine turned on the McCarthy Hearings and the communists looked to escape scrutiny, they became much more socially bold. This brings us to Plank 15 on the 45 Planks of Communism shown below.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
Clearly the Democratic Party had been captured by communists prior to 1958, at least informally. The Democratic platform announced each year at the DNC convention nearly parallels the goals of communism verbatim, and this began during the Red Decade in The United States where many media outlets, universities, and politicians from elite social circles were openly embracing communism as an alternative to capitalism with the same kind of regard that a woman might change shoes from one charity fund raiser to another so to be seen not being so poor to not have other pairs of high heels. In social circles, especially in the 1960’s is was considered high-brow to admire the work of Che Guevara the Cuban revolutionary and right hand man of Fidel Castro. It is within the actions of Che—who continues to be a symbol of anti capitalism among American youth–which the extent of the communist push into the American political system can be measured.
As a young medical student, Guevara traveled throughout South America and was radicalized by the poverty, hunger, and disease he witnessed.[9] His burgeoning desire to help overturn what he saw as the capitalist exploitation of Latin America by the United States prompted his involvement in Guatemala‘s social reforms under President Jacobo Árbenz, whose eventual CIA-assisted overthrow at the behest of the United Fruit Company solidified Guevara’s political ideology.[9] Later, while living in Mexico City, he met Raúl and Fidel Castro, joined their 26th of July Movement, and sailed to Cuba aboard the yacht, Granma, with the intention of overthrowing US-backed Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista.[10] Guevara soon rose to prominence among the insurgents, was promoted to second-in-command, and played a pivotal role in the victorious two-year guerrilla campaign that deposed the Batista regime.[11]
Guevara remains both a revered and reviled historical figure, polarized in the collective imagination in a multitude of biographies, memoirs, essays, documentaries, songs, and films. As a result of his perceived martyrdom, poetic invocations for class struggle, and desire to create the consciousness of a “new man” driven by moral rather than material incentives, he has evolved into a quintessential icon of various leftist-inspired movements. Time magazine named him one of the 100 most influential people of the 20th century,[18] while an Alberto Korda photograph of him entitled Guerrillero Heroico (shown), was cited by the Maryland Institute College of Art as “the most famous photograph in the world”.[19]
Marxist ideological influence
“The merit of Marx is that he suddenly produces a qualitative change in the history of social thought. He interprets history, understands it’s dynamic, predicts the future, but in addition to predicting it (which would satisfy his scientific obligation), he expresses a revolutionary concept: the world must not only be interpreted, it must be transformed. Man ceases to be the slave and tool of his environment and converts himself into the architect of his own destiny.”
— Che Guevara, Notes for the Study of the Ideology of the Cuban, October 1960 [130]
When enacting and advocating Cuban policy, Guevara cited the political philosopher Karl Marx as his ideological inspiration. In defending his political stance, Guevara confidently remarked that “There are truths so evident, so much a part of people’s knowledge, that it is now useless to discuss them. One ought to be Marxist with the same naturalness with which one is “Newtonian” in physics, or “Pasteurian” in biology.”[130]According to Guevara, the “practical revolutionaries” of the Cuban Revolution had the goal of “simply fulfill(ing) laws foreseen by Marx, the scientist.”[130] Using Marx’s predictions and system of dialectical materialism, Guevara professed that “The laws of Marxism are present in the events of the Cuban Revolution, independently of what its leaders profess or fully know of those laws from a theoretical point of view.”[130]
At this stage, Guevara acquired the additional position of Finance Minister, as well as President of the National Bank. These appointments, combined with his existing position as Minister of Industries, placed Guevara at the zenith of his power, as the “virtual czar” of the Cuban economy.[126] As a consequence of his position at the head of the central bank, it was now Guevara’s duty to sign the Cuban currency, which per custom would bear his signature. Instead of using his full name, he signed the bills solely “Che“.[132] It was through this symbolic act, which horrified many in the Cuban financial sector, that Guevara signaled his distaste for money and the class distinctions it brought about.[132] Guevara’s long time friend Ricardo Rojo later remarked that “the day he signed Che on the bills, (he) literally knocked the props from under the widespread belief that money was sacred.”[133]
In an effort to eliminate social inequalities, Guevara and Cuba’s new leadership had moved to swiftly transform the political and economic base of the country through nationalizing factories, banks, and businesses, while attempting to ensure affordable housing, healthcare, and employment for all Cubans.[135] However, in order for a genuine transformation of consciousness to take root, Guevara believed that such structural changes would have to be accompanied by a conversion in people’s social relations and values. Believing that the attitudes in Cuba towards race, women, individualism, and manual labor were the product of the island’s outdated past, Guevara urged all individuals to view each other as equals and take on the values of what he termed “el Hombre Nuevo” (the New Man).[135] Guevara hoped his “new man” would ultimately be “selfless and cooperative, obedient and hard-working, gender-blind, incorruptible, non-materialistic, and anti-imperialist.”[135] To accomplish this, Guevara emphasized the tenets of Marxism-Leninism, and wanted to use the state to emphasize qualities such as egalitarianism and self-sacrifice, at the same time as “unity, equality, and freedom” became the new maxims.[135]Guevara’s first desired economic goal of the new man, which coincided with his aversion for wealth condensation and economic inequality, was to see a nation-wide elimination of material incentives in favor of moral ones. He negatively viewed capitalism as a “contest among wolves” where “one can only win at the cost of others” and thus desired to see the creation of a “new man and woman”.[136] Guevara continually stressed that a socialist economy in itself is not “worth the effort, sacrifice, and risks of war and destruction” if it ends up encouraging “greed and individual ambition at the expense of collective spirit“.[137] A primary goal of Guevara’s thus became to reform “individual consciousness” and values to produce better workers and citizens.[137] In his view, Cuba’s “new man” would be able to overcome the “egotism” and “selfishness” that he loathed and discerned was uniquely characteristic of individuals in capitalist societies.[137] To promote this concept of a “new man”, the government also created a series of party-dominated institutions and mechanisms on all levels of society, which included organizations such as labor groups, youth leagues, women’s groups, community centers, and houses of culture to promote state-sponsored art, music, and literature. In congruence with this, all educational, mass media, and artistic community based facilities were nationalized and utilized to instill the government’s official socialist ideology.[135] In describing this new method of “development”, Guevara stated:
“There is a great difference between free-enterprise development and revolutionary development. In one of them, wealth is concentrated in the hands of a fortunate few, the friends of the government, the best wheeler-dealers. In the other, wealth is the people’s patrimony.”[138]
A further integral part of fostering a sense of “unity between the individual and the mass”, Guevara believed, was volunteer work and will. To display this, Guevara “led by example”, working “endlessly at his ministry job, in construction, and even cutting sugar cane” on his day off.[139] He was known for working 36 hours at a stretch, calling meetings after midnight, and eating on the run.[137] Such behavior was emblematic of Guevara’s new program of moral incentives, where each worker was now required to meet a quota and produce a certain quantity of goods. As a replacement for the pay increases abolished by Guevara, workers who exceeded their quota now only received a certificate of commendation, while workers who failed to meet their quotas were given a pay cut.[137] Guevara unapologetically defended his personal philosophy towards motivation and work, stating:
“This is not a matter of how many pounds of meat one might be able to eat, or how many times a year someone can go to the beach, or how many ornaments from abroad one might be able to buy with his current salary. What really matters is that the individual feels more complete, with much more internal richness and much more responsibility.”[140]
Che went on to become an international sensation—a celebrity that was the greatest advocate of communism in the world during the 1960’s. As a military mind and revolutionary who hated the capitalism of America, he intended to subvert America strategically in the manner that an aggressor might cease a city, by surrounding it until the pent-up occupants were so hungry that they’d do anything to eat. Che Guevara surrounded the philosophy of global capitalism with communism until even the staunchest Republican was questioning their own moral ground—and were willing to accept some aspects of communism so not to be out-maneuvered politically by rivals who followed the example of Che Guevara.
Democrats were those rivals to the Republicans and they were firmly behind Che and the communist takeover of Cuba. Even though it was Kennedy a Democrat who had to deal with Castro during the Cuban Missile Crisis, it was members of his own party that allowed the stalemate to occur in the first place. To allow the Soviet Union to use a communist territory right off the coast of America to terrorize the mainland with nuclear threat was a strategy that was well in place for many years and was hardly a surprise to anyone on the inside who knew the real intentions of communists.
Communism found its way into both American political parties after the failure of the McCarthy hearings to stop the communist advancement as the public had accepted through their universities the continuous communist push by supportive faculty. It was common back then to see campus protests in the 1950’s declaring “Better Red then Dead” which was a KGB designed public relations campaign designed to turn the youth of America against capitalism. It was better to be alive under communism then dead under capitalism which was the message. Communist revolutionaries that reached rock star status like Che Guevara backed up that implanted fear with action.
Many of the politicians today, including the guy who was so mad at being called a RINO by me had their personal political philosophies shaped during the volatile period just described. Their opinions about the world were shaped under the threat of KGB marketing machines and the literal antagonism of Che Guevara. To the exact extent, let us see the situation through the eyes of John F. Kennedy himself during the terrible Cuban Missile crises which was organized strategically by Guevara himself through the firsthand memory of the President’s very young mistress at the time.
In June 1962, Mimi Alford was a 19-year old freshman from Wheaton College who had an internship at the White House. Within four days of meeting her, JFK took her on a tour of the White House, maneuvered her into a bedroom, undressed her, and made love to her “as if it was the most natural thing in the world.”
Alford’s story matters because she spent time with JFK on perhaps the single most important day in his presidency. It came in late October 1962 after the affair had carried on for several months. The U.S. had discovered that the Soviet Union secretly installed nuclear missiles in Cuba to defend the revolutionary government of Fidel Castro. Most of JFK’s national security advisors — and all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — recommended JFK order the invasion of the island to destroy the missiles and overthrow the impudent Castro. JFK, a war hero, resisted. He accepted the lesser measure of a Naval blockade of the island while searching for a diplomatic solution.
Alford, back at school in Massachusetts, evoked the dread of those days when the world stood on the brink of nuclear war, an “atmosphere of deep concern in some quarters and outright hysteria in others. We were warned about a national shortage of bomb shelters. We were besieged with apocalyptic estimates of how many people would die in a nuclear exchange.” No doubt seeking diversion from the burdens of office, JFK invited her to Washington. (He’d sent Jackie Kennedy and his children out-of-town.)
When Alford arrived at the White House on Oct. 28, 1962, Dave Powers, JFK’s personal aide, told her that the president had just sent a message to Moscow asking, for the last time, that the missiles be removed. Many thought war would start within 48 hours.
“Normally, he would have put his presidential duties behind him, had a drink and done his best to lighten up the room,” Alford recalled. Instead, JFK paced, contemplating whether he would soon have to make a decision to send thousands, if not millions, of people to a violent death. At one point, after leaving the room to take another urgent phone call, he came back shaking his head and said to Alford, “I’d rather my children be red than dead.” It wasn’t a political statement or an attempt at levity. These were the words of a father who adored his children and couldn’t bear them being hurt. Thus, this is how both political parties in America accepted communism.
The truth is hard to admit. Most people I know in politics support open socialism and they mistakenly call it capitalism. Their minds are distorted with deal making and political slander—lost to any resemblance of morality because they have been taught incorrect ideals about virtually everything in their life. Those ideals were shaped by the communists of the late 1950’s and 60’s under great duress and fear—under literal terrorism where global communists attacked the philosophy of capitalism with great hate, the way radical Muslims attack Christianity with ruthlessly determined swagger and a sense that their individual lives do not matter so long as the collective whole lives on.
About 30 minutes before Che Guevara was executed in 1967 at the tender young age of 39, Félix Rodríguez privately told a captured Guevara that he was going to be executed. Guevara then responded by asking Rodríguez if he was an American of Mexican or Puerto Rican origin, having noted that Rodríguez did not speak Bolivian Spanish. Rodríguez replied that he was originally from Cuba but that he had emigrated to the US and was currently a member of the CIA. Guevara’s only reply was a loud “ha!” and he refused to speak any more to Rodríguez, who left the hut.
A little later, a few minutes before Guevera was executed, he was asked by one of the Bolivian soldiers guarding him if he was thinking about his own immortality. “No,” he replied, “I’m thinking about the immortality of the revolution.”[206] A few minutes later, Sergeant Terán entered the hut and immediately ordered the other soldiers out. Alone with Terán, Che Guevara then stood up and spoke to his executioner which were his last words: “I know you’ve come to kill me. Shoot. Do it. Shoot me, you coward! You are only going to kill a man!”[207] As Guevara was speaking, Terán hesitated, then opened fire with his M1 Garand semi-automatic rifle, hitting him in the arms and legs. For a few seconds, Guevara writhed on the ground, apparently biting one of his wrists to avoid crying out. Terán then fired several times again, wounding him fatally in the chest. Che Guevara was pronounced dead at 1:10 pm local time according to Rodríguez.[207] In all, Guevara was shot nine times by Terán. That is how selfless, and fanatical communists have always been. They will hide their beliefs until it serves their strategic objective, then they will stop at nothing to execute their goal—even if it means their death.
American politics was captured during this period of revolution and it continues to be shaped to this day by communism, falsely believed to have been defeated during the Cold War. The current government shut-down is a long culmination of these events where years and years of abuse have finally collapsed on itself economically. The nature of these politicians is now clear. They are only functionaries under a system that is riddled with socialism by a communist push that has lasted for nearly 100 years in America, but climaxed right after the release of The Naked Communist. The situation is so bad that the so-called bastion of the Republican Party, the current Speaker of the House and my direct congressman, John Boehner was caught trying to cut a deal with the Democrats Harry Reid and Barack Obama to exclude at least the political class from the socialism of Obamacare. READ MORE AT THE LINK BELOW FOR DETAILS.
I sent that article to some of the people who fund Boehner’s campaign in my area leaving them in a difficult position. What they will do with that information is the result of years of communism—if they deny Boehner campaign funds they risk having a communist oriented Democrat representing them in congress. If they try to crack down on Boehner without the collective support of other fundraisers, they may find themselves and their business scrutinized by the federal government unfavorably—so it is risky to do anything. Of course Boehner knows all this. His dilemma in trying to strike a deal with Reid was similar to the one that JFK was faced with while having sex with his 19-year-old mistress, it’s better red than dead. Rather than fight Obamacare outright at first, until the Tea Party members of the Republican Party voiced their protests, Boehner wanted to at least work out an exemption for himself, his family and his members—as Speaker of the House. He hoped to work out a concession. John Boehner’s focus was not on the deceitful ways that Obamacare was passed, on the disguise of it as a tax to shove it through the Democratically controlled House and Senate, the Supreme Court Ruling allowing it to stand as a “tax” on the American public when it was really sold as another entitlement—on the origin of the deal to make all Americans customers to the insurance industry whether they wanted to or not compelling them under force to buy something—Boehner could only think about himself just like the terrible day in 1962 just before his assassination in Texas where Kennedy confided to his lover—its better red than dead.
Obamacare is a communist dream and its start can be traced back to the intention of communists in 1958 to infiltrate both political parties in America. There can be no question that they were successful based on the actions of the current House Speaker John Boehner who is a functioning communist believing with all his heart and soul that he’s a fiscal conservative. When faced with the realization that it is better red then dead, even the hardest core conservative will choose to go red, so to protect their own lives from the threat of communism which they fear so intensely, they no longer even call it by its proper name.
To know how ridiculously misleading and parasitic the Lakota school system intends to make itself upon the community which is its host it is important to read the quarter page public awareness column that the community newspaper gives to Lakota’s Superintendent each week. This latest week, as much as their campaign strategy has been designed to diffuse my “narcissism” Mantia acknowledges that she is reading here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom frequently, because she addressed several of my recent points made upon these pages. Her topic this week was a proposal to reduce fees in extracurricular activities so to increase student participation. But first she felt she needed to set the record straight on the value of teachers who volunteer their time—“for a small fee of course”—to provide students with extracurricular activities. She said, “Many, though not all of our extra-curriculars are guided by our teachers. They earn a small amount of extra money for doing it, but the vast majority put in far more hours than they’re required to, because they love what they’re doing and know how much it means to kids. Per-hour our coaches and advisors could make far more money working at any fast food restaurant.” The most dangerous part of that statement is that Mantia is a quarter million dollar member of Lakota’s management team and they are preparing to engage the labor union in 2014 contract negotiations. Mantia clearly is on the side of the teachers and the union based on just the statement she provided above—so anyone hoping that Lakota will put up a good fight against the union can wake up. Mantia is a former teacher, and she is on the business side of teachers. The management at Lakota is bought and paid for by the labor union and they are just “narcissistic” enough to believe that the residents of Lakota are stupid enough to supplement their scam with higher taxes.
Mantia goes on to say, “The two qualities we see young people develop so often in extra-curricular activities are leadership and teamwork. They also learn the value of sacrifice and hard work, and often, other life lessons. They may have to accept that they may not always be the star. Sometimes they will have other roles to fill.” She goes on for several more paragraphs with the same kind of progressive drivel for the next quarter page in the newspaper in that same fashion neglecting to report that the causes for the high fees imposed upon students and their families in the first place are due to her mismanagement. She chose to raise sports fees to punish parents for voting down Lakota’s previous three levies, and not ask the teachers and other Lakota employees to take a 5% pay cut which was proposed by No Lakota Levy after the levy defeats. Instead she advised the rest of Lakota’s management to raise sports fees to protect the teachers who work under her from unnecessary public scrutiny over their average salaries of 63K per year. She chose protecting the highly paid public employees over the community health then, and now to appear as though she were doing the community a favor ahead of the fourth levy attempt, she is floating the idea of being “compassionate” so that she can earn votes for a levy allowing her to throw that money gained straight at her upcoming union contract—which she already blew the negotiations by revealing her pro-teacher position—which for those who know her was a foregone conclusion. CLICK HERE TO SEE THE FINANCIAL FACTS ABOUT THE UPCOMING LEVY.
Mantia had the audacity to state that her teachers would make more money working at a fast food restaurant then they would be paid to stick around a few extra hours a day to teach kids during extra-curricular activities. For those who aren’t so good at math, with an average salary of 63K per year, the teachers average approximately $30 dollars an hour, so teachers can make a lot of extra cash off their “extra-curricular sacrifices.” But what’s worse in Mantia’s comments are the things she values from these experiences which come straight out of the progressive playbook, sacrifice, team-work and other “shared values.”
The statements about communist penetration of our public schools have been underway for many years, so long that it is doubtful that Mantia has the intellectual history to grapple with the issues. She and her teachers are paid well to not pay attention to the “big picture” only to teach it. She was raised into the system and knows of nothing else. The attack against America was subtle, and occurred before her time. She believes she is sticking up for her employees with her comments and support of another tax increase against the community. But she is the one who’s narcissistic, and wrong. My father-in-law was visiting over the weekend and told me the story of how on Friday he was called into a school district where he lives in Kentucky as a substitute—a very affluent district that is the home of many thoroughbred owners. The demographics there are very similar to Lakota. He was called in to teach as he has been a teacher for public schools for several decades, and now in his later years does it only as a substitute. He holds several degrees, one of them a Master’s in geology. He reported his anger to me upon seeing two of the topics given by an advanced English teacher to their class written on the chalk board, one on the merits of Marxism, the other on the merits of feminism. Students had to pick one of those two topics to write about. It wasn’t hidden with subtle dialogue the way that Lakota hides their progressive educations, because there isn’t a narcissistic Rich Hoffman in my father-in-law’s school district to call them out, so they recklessly placed their agenda up on the chalk board for all to see. He was aghast at what his very affluent public school was teaching children and his obvious question—why wasn’t there a third topic about capitalism to choose from? The answer was that public schools are not about American traditional values, they are about collapsing economies and advancing fairness for all—at the expense of productivity. They are about higher taxes through schools as a way to redistribute income from one sector of the economy to another and they advance their agenda recklessly through the narcissism of the parents who support a large centralized institution that is simply a parasite upon the community. Those parents believe that in exchange for their support of people like Superintendent Mantia, and the 63K per year teachers at Lakota, that their child will escape a life of mediocrity and become successful adults. But what those parents discover too late is that the taxes raised are intended to be spent on teaching their children the merits of sacrifice—of sharing their wealth for the benefit of others. What their children are learning, which was confirmed in the comments of Superintendent Mantia in the Sunday, September 15, 2013 edition of Today’s Pulse of Butler County, is that kids are learning to work hard for the sacrifice of others so that collective society can advance fulfilling the aims of communists many years ago. These school officials will mislead, manipulate, and stoop to any low to advance the progressive platform.
The fight of our day is not in Syria, Russia, or even the Middle East, it is in our public schools where saboteurs are using our money stolen from property taxes to convert our children into socialists through an advanced communist plot hatched before Superintendent Mantia was even born. She is paid to advance that plot and look not too closely at their intentions—which is driven by government for the service of government with the ultimate example of narcissism provided anywhere. And it is our task to put an end to their scheme. There is no hiding it now; they are out in the open with their intentions. All that is required now is to admit that such sinister plots are at play and they intend to feed off the innocent minds of our children for a social goal that is not in their best interest. As Mantia said in her article, sometimes kids need to “learn the value of sacrifice and hard work, and often, other life lessons. They may have to accept that they may not always be the star. Sometimes they will have other roles to fill.” Those roles under communism are to work hard for the benefit of the greater good, a greater good that is determined by mother government for the benefit of itself and the employees who make it grow.
One of the reasons I like movies so much, especially ones like Man of Steel is that they challenge social beliefs and the standards of our day. Prior to the release of Man of Steel, progressive statist lovers who relish themselves in the entertainment industry like maggots on spoiled food had written poor reviews about the new Superman movie basically saying that Kal-El, as he was portrayed in the film, was too good to be believable. This is a remarkable statement and if one takes the time to let it sink in just a bit, is it any wonder that our society is so broken, so crime ridden, so morally and financially bankrupt? In spite of the critics, Man of Steel has soared to extraordinary box office success which for me is a social vote against the attempt of progressives to steer our society into more statist philosophy. When as many people show up to see a movie like Man of Steel in such a short period of time, it is a flat our rejection of the kind of statist culture that is being offered by modern-day intelligentsia. But the king of negative reviews that I found absolutely intriguing is the one below from Alexandra Petri from The Washington Post. Apparently the Man of Steel hit a really raw nerve with her, which is good because it shows what these types of people really believe in their hearts. If I had to guess based on the review by Alexandra, I would say she came from a broken home, found herself passed out and drunk at a party more than once not able to find her cloths, and is having a hard time maintaining a stable relationship with a man. She is a product of the progressive era, and the public schools that raise millions of children to believe in the same types of diabolical behavior patterns. Because she thinks in such a way is why the Washington Post hired her to begin with, as she can write articles in a way that the masses can understand—or at least thinks they understand until something like Man of Steel comes along and shows society how far they have fallen from the tree of goodness. For some, they yearn to take steps in their life to be closer to the ideal of Superman. For others like Alexandra Petri, they find the idea of Superman to be utterly perplexing, out-dated, and an image that fills them with guilt, instead of hope. Read her article for yourself. I put the whole article up with a link at the end.
Man of Steel — have we outgrown Superman?
By Alexandra Petri, Published: June 20, 2013 The Washington Post
I dislike Superman.
Let me rephrase that.
I don’t like Superman.
I understand that he is America, or Jesus, or both at the same time, with Maximum Levels of Allegory and slightly better hair.
But who is he? A concatenation of catchphrases with perfect teeth and rippling muscles.
He’s perfect, and like anything perfect, he’s bland.
And here I thought it was just Brandon Routh that was the problem.
No, even in the gritty reboot “Man of Steel” currently In Theaters near you, he’s a problem. I saw the movie feeling a sense of obligation. It’s Superman. We love Superman. Of course we’re seeing Man of Steel.
But he feels dated. Everyone else these days is custom — flawed, just like you and me. Superman is one-size-fits-all perfection.
It’s not that he possesses so many virtues. As W. H. Auden said, “A vice in common can be the ground of a friendship but not a virtue in common. X and Y may be friends because they are both drunkards or womanizers but, if they are both sober and chaste, they are friends for some other reason.”
Superman lacks vices. At a critical moment in this summer’s “Man of Steel,” trying to sap his fighting spirit, someone yells, “OH YEAH? Well, you have a MORAL COMPASS and I DON’T!” As taunts go, this is only marginally more menacing than yelling, “OH YEAH? WELL, YOU HAVE REALLY NICE TEETH!” There’s nothing to insult.
Superman is your friend with a truck.
You cultivate his acquaintance in case you ever need help moving or a ride to a wine tasting in the country or defense against alien attack. But you wouldn’t want to sit next to him at dinner. You invite him to your wedding on the off-chance he will turn some of the water into wine. But what do you say to him?
Superman is genetically gifted to the point that he has never actually been required to make conversation. Late in the film, he whips a drone out of the sky, and an officer smiles blandly at him. “He’s kinda hot,” she says. What else can you say?
Let me insert the caveat that I am a fair-weather comics fan. I am the sunshine patriot and summer filmgoer. I didn’t grow up reading the issues or even watching Smallville; maybe there is an iteration of the hero that answers these questions satisfactorily.
At least in the film, his back story is depressing because it turns out he’s not just special for Earth — he’s special for his home planet Krypton, too. “The first natural birth in centuries!” his Space Dad, Russell Crowe, proclaims. Apparently he contains the lives of all future Kryptonians encoded in his body somewhere. It is a pity they forgot to include any personality with that.
But what personality could you fit?
Personality is something you are forced to develop to make people like you in spite of your inherent deficiencies. This is why when people say, “He has a wonderful personality,” it is usually shorthand for “He resembles a fat stoat.” If you are attractive and flawless, like Superman, what personality do you need? This is why Cyrano de Bergerac, with his giant hideous nose, has a rapier wit and is the life of the party, and Christian de Neuvillette, so handsome that people fall in love with him spontaneously across rooms, cannot complete a sentence to save his life. Adversity builds character. If you’re a diamond living among pumice, good luck being shaped into anything. No wonder Superman’s bland. When he gets bullied as a kid, his greatest struggle is not melting the bullies with his eyes. Forget first-world problems; he’s in a category by himself.
Of course, being in a category by yourself is its own kind of pain. He is the last of a species, alone, isolated, orphaned — but we don’t see that in the movie, except in brief flashbacks. If anything, he has too many living family members to be a high-functioning superhero. There’s nothing to latch onto in this Clark Kent, just a flying grin and a lot of explosions.
My understanding of myth structure, from Joseph Campbell, is that the essence of most hero stories is as follows: the hero Goes To The Father To Seek The Boon (getting help from a variety of archetypal figures and overcoming a variety of obstacles on the way), the hero obtains the boon, the hero returns and uses the boon to Save the People.
The trouble with Superman is that he already has the boon. He’s faster than a speeding bullet, capable of — yadda, yadda, yadda. As a consequence, the movie consists of numerous people delivering inspirational speeches to Superman about his unique capacity to save the world, and then he goes and does it. He doesn’t have to struggle to get where he is. But hey, there are a lot of explosions.
Still, is that enough?
What do we need from our myths?
Superman has always been a decently heavy-handed allegory: somebody’s only son sent to dedicate his life to save the human race? Gee. Who might this be?
Everyone else these days is so flawed. Iron Man has something resembling PTSD. Poor Captain America has come unstuck in time. Batman — don’t get me started on Batman. “Hey guys,” Superman says, sitting down at the bar next to them. “Rough day. I’m completely invulnerable to all earth substances, but also, I can fly!”
“Please leave,” Bruce Banner says, turning a little green.
The other superheroes filling our screens this summer have had a process of becoming. Superman doesn’t become. He just lands. He’s just super. He’s all the fun of playing Make Believe with a 6-year-old who keeps changing the rules on you so that he’s invulnerable and always wins.
Superman is the hero we don’t deserve but need right now. Here he comes now with that truck of his, just in time to help.
It is because of people like Alexandra Petri that we have Barack Obama as president, more scandals in Washington in just a couple of years than all of them combined during the last century, and the moral compass of America that is faltering under rudderless leadership by beta men who eat out of the hand of alpha women, who secretly are always on the lookout for the alpha male—who using Petri’s metaphor–is always the guy with the truck. It not that she’s a bad person, or even a devious progressive. In her article, she was honest, so I won’t rip her to shreds over what she wrote. But she represents a great sickness that is destroying entire generations and is what people like me see as philosophically worse than catching the bubonic plague.
Of course people like Alexandra Petri have to live in their bodies and the minds that have molded them, so they have no other point of reference but to look at a film like Man of Steel and find reasons to make fun of it, because she can’t relate. It isn’t her opinion that is the problem, but the fact that she cannot relate to a person who does not have vices, or rather that she believes that vices are what built relationships in the first place. Her statements are as ridiculous as two businessmen who are nurturing a deal, who go out drinking to become intoxicated so both can see weaknesses in each other so that trust between the two can be shared with a common secret. Any relationship built upon such foundations is doomed to fail, just as a society built on vices, and personal failures will collapse on itself.
I blame the creation of people like Alexandra Petri not on a disagreement over social philosophy, but of the origin of her thoughts to begin with, to the parents who obviously instructed her wrong, to the life situations that shaped her mind to believe that virtue is inferior to vice. To each and every teacher in her public school that helped mold her mind to believe that having a “moral compass” is an out-dated ideal, and that it is appropriate to be nice to someone just so you can use them to help deliver something with their truck.
Alexandra Petri from The Washington Post represents the common demographic of 20 to 35 year olds in 2013 America—a lost generation that is hopelessly misplaced, and teetering on the precipice of disaster. The only thing that keeps these rudderless beings afloat is the socialist mechanisms of the previous generation who gave them the New Deal and the Great Society, which are not sustainable financially. Alexandra Petri is a child of those two progressive concepts and for her Superman is not about hope, but an unrealized ideal of what mankind is supposed to be. Man is not supposed to be perfect, they are to be flawed, scandalous, and judged not by the merit of their work or quality of life, but by their vices.
Ironically lost to Alexandra is the metaphor that the type of qualities she found important and lacking in Kal-El, are the kind of values that General Zod proposed in the film. An America led by people like Alexandra Petri are doomed to live out in real life what the fictional fate of Krypton turned out to be. Yet she didn’t see that parallel. She just saw her anxiety over the kind of perfection that was presented by Superman with a concept that was so foreign to her that the magic was lost. For her, she needs people with fault to feel they have a personality, and she is far from alone. If I had to put a number on the amount of people in society who think the same way she does, I’d say that it’s as high as 85%. Many of them most likely left the Man of Steel movie feeling the same way, like they know they are supposed to like Superman, in the same way that people are supposed to like church—with a rebellious reverence to the idea of goodness that can be pushed back against with rejection, even though their bodies go through the motions of attending.
Alexandra Petri is allowed to think whatever she wants. But she is forbidden to make decisions on my behalf, and that includes burdening me with goof-ball presidents like Barack Obama, unmanaged public education costs, government scandals, NSA spying, and more socialism in our current government with more entitlement programs. Because she can vote, and does, and supports a democratic mode of government, then Alexandra’s bad ideas are in direct competition with my ideas, and those thoughts about reality are not compatible. When she complains that she wants to see a flawed Superman, she speaks to a desire to create a flawed society—and she votes accordingly. I on the other hand expect Superman to be flawless, and I live my life in a way to represent that idea. When Alexandra Petri makes fun of the virtuous perfection that Superman represents, she is stating that my expectations human beings should strive to be all that they can be, and still push for more is too difficult, and unrealistic since such people lack personality, which is more important than value.
When it is wondered why the world is so screwed up, just read the article above and imagine millions of people like Alexandra Petri living their lives looking to hire, befriend, and interact socially not with the best that the human race has to offer, but the worst, because vices, imperfection, and perilous human weaknesses are endearing personality traits that people like Alexandra can relate to—which makes them good. It should come as no surprise then when our society fails, because it is led in a mob-like democracy by people like Alexandra Petri who have been taught that all the things that are valuable are the things that make human beings the most disgusting.
![LAKOTA-LETTER[1]](https://richhoffmanbooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/lakota-letter1.jpg)
The Overmanwarrior 